From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; t=1793606989; b=Ku+krFM/zQWYfnrJfF2rF/le+27cyOmXayOvJJCLib9PwJhPi6yjziSJxFkWPCqu+pPh j6XNjwBr01OFPIyAL3Qy558cDmTXATQ9pd0cbKoiW4+sDlyGejvkBUhQbWzxwHFS1rAOc pSXOy6tIY5eMVI4Zpuf7W89+0Cdt/9Dm3F8wCcRGeBUUzWE7Ca+JJlwkTcV0Hme8VAcDg sprSgQ2vGAB/vhariaeljukk0lo10vBh5IBJx2/baejVcN6jt4HaU6mLWnIf7ksOjz6Lt 6mAz800FcUaNgOwWzNVwAl1cKebQaC9mJS7WN74CUNh/B1aGpOtIToITB6YSUs8nmlw== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc20261015; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1793606989; h=Received:DKIM-Signature:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID: In-Reply-To:References:Auto-Submitted:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:MIME-Version; bh=Z9zRtXHe/J1k/4/9wAeq1n+PwAt+ioXmV3zyjSNrjDw=; b=s8A37k3TP3XfhwYQvbq9nOglgpSzcHuw6aRQeyRKah++qmcfFBsqHlrZTCtGmshd8p5s 516t8I8uzEs6fbfC+1nshIzufhrM7LxRxCyUv4bDX/lKlFacD2Q870G/v1xq3Jn6gW5dd +6iOTUs7IY20zn0Yj2SrLcVqbRs90Y/oxpaoqWkF5VHkIvWbwshzZbC1Hw1tXsgsDjif6 aCK7PZfgZjQMi1wOtdNWhEvSNa6Mn72Eg1iIg3pnL7iKO8yHeuXZQbmKCgsvTqjXB/n3m JlFqnjDl6BM/ch2fNtNzBFFEzEBde9pxCMY4TEgt3x+3u0ieBSnaaqptyqL4t2PLlfA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b=T4wsn2ij; arc=none smtp.remote-ip=100.103.45.18 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (quasi.space.kernel.org [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (prime256v1)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 450FC606A324 for ; Mon, 2 Nov 2026 08:09:48 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key, unprotected) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=k20260515 header.b=T4wsn2ij Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8C6C51F000C1; Mon, 2 Nov 2026 08:09:48 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1793606988; bh=Z9zRtXHe/J1k/4/9wAeq1n+PwAt+ioXmV3zyjSNrjDw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=T4wsn2ij3otwsrSVCtkcEnPwuHvRZ5W+uajybO+DnCsgXD+vXohEJbh/yHrAVzQDf mzKm8GZwKH2aU7TxTX0NR9QvfQph5iLHXMsTJo5YKs7MP/IB0fPERczxZt/JB4cwpJ jf9ukdNkuO/NJ2Z6j2Tz5FFDDzklSajQAGxlI90Ya757dj5d2/z2saaeYYl4LAFZJC kMYTskn75WQLRh8Glys4dqhYekRiOwTw+5Jf0CuQmX3D7LXUeIZCsapk6SSoQh1zc8 zcC5DjTkzPqqhJ3ILzmZeCHm4LhACXo3WCZhQwXOxFVlsATwPlXoVx2j+XYFpzdj7g 3esXL9pfhVaYw== From: netdev-bot+sinfo@kernel.org To: Steffen Klassert Cc: David Miller , Jakub Kicinski , Herbert Xu , netdev@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 01/14] xfrm: retry inexact policy lookup after node reinsertion Date: Mon, 02 Nov 2026 08:09:48 +0000 Message-ID: <179360698804.3286.12919312656209223593@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20261102100451.2505200-2-steffen.klassert@secunet.com> References: <20261102100451.2505200-1-steffen.klassert@secunet.com> <20261102100451.2505200-2-steffen.klassert@secunet.com> Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: List-Owner: Precedence: list MIME-Version: 1.0 Hi! This is an automated message. This series looks like a fix, but its commit messages seem to be missing some information: - How the issue was discovered, e.g. hit in production, hit during development, syzbot report, manual code inspection, LLM or static analysis tool scan. - Whether the issue was actually triggered, or is only theoretical (e.g. found by code inspection). If it was triggered please include the symptoms, like the stack trace or error messages. Please do not repost the series just to address the above. Instead, reply to this email with the missing information, so that reviewers can take it into account. If the series needs another revision for other reasons, please include the information in the commit messages then. The evaluation is done by an LLM so it may be wrong, if you think that is the case please reply and explain.